Cases 1 - 10 of 770
Meyers v. Bailey
as 2:2024cv00360
Plaintiff:
David Meyers
Defendant:
Warden Mack Bailey
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Wysinger v. Bryson et al
as 7:2024cv00350
Plaintiff:
Kendall D. Wysinger
Defendant:
Mr. S. Bryson and Warden Mr. John Doe
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Fogel v. Hall et al
as 7:2024cv00355
Plaintiff:
Daniel Brian Fogel
Defendant:
Major T. Hall, Warden Jeffrey Artrip, Assistant Warden J.H. Blevins and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Lee v. Stanton et al
as 3:2024cv00395
Plaintiff:
Gilford Lee
Defendant:
D. Stanton, Warden Larry T. Edmonds and Reg. Administrator Adrian Tucker
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Stokes v. Bateman
as 7:2024cv00342
Plaintiff:
Monte M. Stokes
Defendant:
Assistant Warden J. Bateman
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Felix v. Warden, USP Lee
as 7:2024cv00321
Petitioner:
Benjamin Arellano Felix
Respondent:
Warden, USP Lee
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Wilson v. WARDEN - Lawrenceville Correctional Center
as 1:2024cv00826
Plaintiff:
Tamir A. Wilson
Defendant:
WARDEN - Lawrenceville Correctional Center
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Nealy v. Warden of MCTC et al
as 2:2024cv00291
Petitioner:
Michael Nealy
Respondent:
Warden of MCTC and Maryland Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Gaskins v. Back et al
as 7:2024cv00305
Plaintiff:
John C. Gaskins
Defendant:
Warden Tim Back, Major Stokes and Captain Gordon
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Nicholson v. Bureau of Prisons et al
as 2:2024cv00282
Plaintiff:
Leon Nicholson
Defendant:
Bureau of Prisons, Warden Zook, D. Jones and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
